Update_File_Metadata

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description must carry full burden. It states 'update' but does not disclose whether it replaces or merges metadata, idempotency, side effects, permission requirements, or error behavior. Minimal transparency beyond the verb.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence with no redundant information. Efficiently conveys the core purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite having 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is only one sentence. It lacks details on expected input format for metadata, whether folder_name is a path or name, return value, error cases, or any behavioral nuances. Incomplete for a mutation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It adds 'one or more SharePoint list-item metadata fields' but does not explain the structure of the metadata object (e.g., key-value pairs, allowed fields). Folder_name and file_name are self-explanatory but lack any additional context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'update', the resource 'SharePoint list-item metadata fields for a document', and the scope 'one or more'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like Get_File_Metadata (read) and Update_Document (different action).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like Get_File_Metadata or Update_Document. No mention of preconditions or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.